She's such a little weasel (apologies to weasels). Rejecting the GP's democratic processes because single mums can't afford to go to conference & vote in person, therefore it was rabid ideologues and privileged activists who swung the vote. You can bet if it had gone the other way she'd be singing the praises of the system. Also, she and others repeatedly sabotaged the motion in previous meetings which
were conducted online, so clearly this is more about throwing her weight around because the hoi polloi had the temerity to see things differently to her 'nuanced' wishy-washy bullsh!t. Shades of Brecht:
'[...] the people had squandered the confidence of the government and could only win it back by redoubled work. Would it not in that case be simpler for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?' -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung Anyway, here's the big steaming pile:
*****
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/greens/2026/10/the-green-party-has-urgent-work-to-do (paywall)
https://archive.is/20261009091549/https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/greens/2026/10/the-green-party-has-urgent-work-to-do The Green Party has urgent work to do
The “Zionism is racism” motion crossed a very significant red line
By Caroline Lucas
Perhaps Zack Polanski was never going to win Holborn and St Pancras. It’s been a Labour stronghold for over 50 years after all, and it was always going to be a big ask. But his job was certainly not made any easier by the vote at the Green Party conference this weekend in favour of the “Zionism is racism” motion.
The backlash has been predictable and swift, with the Party condemned as itself racist and antisemitic. Those of us who spoke against the motion were clear: the policies and approach of this Israeli government are racist, its actions in Gaza amount to genocide, and a campaign of boycott, sanctions and divestment is necessary and legitimate. But supporting a motion which effectively denies Israel’s right to exist crosses a very significant red line.
The attempt to assert and impose a singular definition of Zionism, as this motion vainly attempts to do, was always going to be contested. As I set out in my own speech in Brighton on Sunday (4 October), Zionism is not a clearly defined, singular ideology. It means different things to different people, whether we like it or not. It has always been so.
Is the Israeli government racist? Yes. Is Zionism racist? It is both racist and a response to racism. It’s double-sided. The political Zionism movement emerged as a direct response to oppression and persecution within Europe. So for European Jews, it wasn’t always ideology that propelled them to Israel: often they were simply refugees fleeing for their lives after centuries of persecution and pogroms, culminating in the horror of the Holocaust.
Of course that doesn’t justify the appalling treatment of the Palestinians, or in any way lessen their unbearable pain. Nothing possibly could. But it explains why, for many European Jews, Zionism was historically a response to racism. It also explains why, for Palestinians, losing their land and sometimes their lives, Zionism was and remains a violent, exclusionary and racist project, resulting in their expulsion and ongoing statelessness.
As the Palestinian scholar Dr Raef Zreik has said: “The European sees the back of the Jewish refugee fleeing for their life. The Palestinian sees the face of the settler colonialist taking over their land.” And both of these things can be true at the same time.
One of the most dangerous outcomes of rising populism and polarisation is a refusal to accept complexities, to deal only in zero-sum binaries. And so the radical over-simplification at the heart of the “Zionism is racism” motion has led to many Jewish people, both inside and outside the party, feeling scared and unwelcome. For many of them, the knowledge about why their ancestors or families fled Europe and sought sanctuary in Palestine can, and often does, simultaneously sit alongside their utter abhorrence at the actions and ideology of the state of Israel now. But asking all Jewish people to deny the historical realities that might explain their own families’ attachment to Israel as a sanctuary is not an ask our movement should or needs to make.
I don’t believe the vast majority of Green Party members would wish to do so either. So how have we arrived at this place? It’s worth recalling that this motion was supported by 1022 self-selected members – just 0.5 per cent of the Party’s total membership – an unknown number of whom were actively encouraged to join the Green Party simply to vote to push the motion through. This speaks volumes about the vulnerability of our internal structures. Entryism has been a problem for many parties, but with our commitment to direct democracy and our cumbersome internal accountability mechanisms, the Greens are woefully exposed.
Conference is where the Party makes its policy. Some will argue that a system where any member can come and vote at conference (or indeed simply log on and do so online) is a sign of a healthy internal democracy. Many of us have long argued the opposite: that for party policy to be decided by the relatively tiny proportion of members whose personal circumstances and political motivation allow them the time and often the money to engage at conference is not just profoundly undemocratic and unfair but distorting. People who work weekends, who have caring responsibilities, who are struggling with a cost-of-living crisis are unlikely to be in a position to give up three days to party deliberation and debate.
In the weeks and months to come, we Greens have urgent work to do: taking action to show everyone in our communities, especially Jewish people, that our party is safe for them; finding ways of making our party’s policy making processes more inclusive and effective, our internal structures more accountable and resilient, and our understanding of both antisemitism and Zionism more informed. We might not have won Holborn and St Pancras, but our political influence remains. With over 1000 councillors and 230,000 members, as heatwaves follow floods, we are now part of our nation’s political landscape.
If Greens had not gained our first parliamentary by-election seat in Gorton and Denton in February, followed by record local election results in May, which saw Labour lose four times as many votes to Greens as to Reform, Keir Starmer could still be prime minister. From immigration and Brexit, to public ownership and electoral reform, Greens have successfully pushed Labour to be braver and bolder. And nowhere more so than the about-face on the West Bank and Gaza, from Starmer calling for water and electricity to be cut off to Ed Miliband demanding sanctions and more – Greens helped do this.
In order to reap the benefits of that shift, to ensure the atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank remain a key focus of government attention, and to work together with others to build a progressive majority, we will need to regain the progressive high ground. I believe the vast majority of we Greens accept that. A lot of people are hurting. We’re saddened and we’re sorry. We know our Party Conference failed a vital test – and we’re determined to put it right.
on October 9, 2026, 11:55 am